Headlines have branded
them as “pikeys” “nimby gypsies” and “mobs.” Tabloids have demanded a “Stamp on
the camps” whilst regional press tells tales of whole communities coming
together to fight the “gypsy war.” They’re also the subject of one of Channel
4’s most watched series, Big Fat Gypsy Weddings, a show which homogenises
disparate ethnic groups under one loaded term and portrays them as marriage-obsessed
and prone to violence.

It is not surprising then
that coverage like this has caused journalist and campaigner Mike Doherty to
claim that portrayals of these communities represent “the last socially acceptable
form of racism in Britain.” Yet are these examples really symptomatic of an
industry-wide prejudice and bias? Are journalists taking enough steps to ensure
fair coverage in their reports on communities who are the subject of ingrained
hostility in some sections of the public?

“My sister and I don’t go out alone now because we’re afraid
of what might happen to us.”

Shannon O’Donnell lives in her family’s caravan in an area of
Scotland with an un-newsworthy crime rate. Yet she and her sister will now only
leave their home when accompanied by others, even if it’s just to go to the
local shop. Her reason?

“It’s because of the way we get reported on by the
newspapers and in Big Fat Gypsy Weddings.”

She has come to the annual conference organised by the Irish
Traveller Movement in Britain (ITMB) along with 200 others to discuss how to
combat the prejudice they as Travellers and Romany Gypsies face on a daily
basis.

“When we were on our
way to a convention recently a group of men approached us at a Road Chef and
told us that they were going to “grab” us.”

Speaking of the incident, she looks distressed.

“It’s not something that Travellers do, it was a few
individual people but we’ve been blanket labelled. Luckily our parents were
there to warn them to back off but it was frightening that they thought they
had some sort of right to do that to us because it’s apparently “what we do”.

“Journalists just don’t realise the physical impact their
stories can have on our community.”

Despite living in Britain for over 500 years Traveller
communities who share long histories and common traits have only recently been
officially recognised as ethnic minorities under the Race Relations Act. This
includes Irish and Scottish Travellers and Romany Gypsies, who altogether
number around 300,000 people in Britain. Under common law rulings this means that they
are now covered by the same anti-discrimination legislation that protects other
ethnic groups from prejudicial treatment.

Consequently this means they should be protected against discriminatory
and unfair practices in broadcasting under the sanctionable ethical codes of
practice adopted by the BBC and Ofcom. It also technically warrants their
inclusion in the Press Complaints Commission and NUJ guidelines, unenforceable
yet moral self-regulatory codes, the latter of which is currently subject to
wholesale overhaul following the Leveson Inquiry. But could this apparent need
to overhaul the ethical regulations of the print industry alongside anaemic
responses of broadcasting regulators to allegations of hurtful discrimination
within My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding suggest that no top-down system of regulation
is currently working well on its own?

Much anecdotal evidence suggests that most people have never
knowingly met someone of ethnic Traveller descent. David Enright, the solicitor who helped ITMB
file a complaint to OFCOM against Big Fat Gypsy Weddings, thinks: “There’s only
one place people can get these views from and that’s the media.”

This could make the role and responsibility of the media, as
one of the few points of contact between non-Traveller and Traveller
communities, increasingly potent.

Like Shannon, ITMB reports suggest that media impressions are
often stereotypical and negative and influence real-life interactions.

In a letter to the Leveson Inquiry it stated: “prejudiced
reporting creates the perception that the cultural difference between ethnic
Travellers and the rest of society are so wide and glaring that Travellers will
always be outsiders.”

This year’s Big Fat Gypsy Weddings provoked criticisms from
viewers. It was only in November, eight months after it was last broadcast, when
OFCOM decided to launch an official investigation into the series. Lord
Avebury, secretary of the all-parliamentary group for Gypsies and Travellers,
in a speech called the series “extraordinarily immoral and powerful to society.”

Enright appeared perplexed when asked at the conference
about the programme’s messages and the use of the tagline “bigger, fatter,
gypsier.”

He said: “You wouldn’t use it for any other ethnic group: Imagine
saying “Bigger, fatter, Jewier."

Georgia McCann, a Scottish Traveller who hosts seminars to
educate non-Traveller professionals about the communities, knows first-hand the
effects media coverage can have.

“A lot of people who come to my training seminars watch this
programme for background research. They start to look us over to find
stereotypical elements to visually identify us as a Traveller such as jewellery
and then make other assumptions about us based on the show’s characters.

“Since it was on TV I no longer wear any because I don’t
want to be picked out of a crowd and have these links between my appearance and
my personality made. People tend to lump Romany Gypsy, Traveller and Roma
groups together as one; totally overlooking the differences between the
different communities.

“Anything like the OFCOM investigation is good but there’s
just not enough being done: it’s like trying to plant a couple of seeds in a
hurricane.”

It would be overly-simplistic to say all or even a specific
section of the media is biased or uncompromisingly prejudiced. The Sun is
notorious nationally for its “Stamp on the Camps” and “war on the gipsy free
for all” campaigns. However even it has run a couple of articles which attempt
to highlight discriminatory efforts to re-enforce stereotypes within Channel
4’s series. Then there is the BBC, which at the national level at least appears
to have made efforts to enshrine its charter obligation of impartiality, with
shows such as the two-part documentary, Travellers, offering a more honest look at Scottish Travellers’ day-to-day
lives. The Guardian has adopted a more analytical view, digging deeper in its
reports than some in other sections of the national press. Its journalists find stories that go beyond
shallow preoccupations with 14 stone wedding dresses and bare-knuckle fighting.

For the editor of Travellers’ Times, Damian le Bas, and out-going NUJ president Donnacha
DeLong it is in regional media outlets where unsatisfactory reporting on
Traveller communities can be more apparent. Wracked by owners’ cuts to staff the
financial and time constraints on reporters and their research are implicit.

Donnacha says: “We’ve seen lots of cuts in local media where
most stories surrounding these communities take place. The problem is that
there are fewer journalists who now have to cover larger areas. This means they
don’t always know the story well so the easiest aspect for them to cover is the
crime aspect given to them by the police.

“I’m not blaming the
journalists; I’m blaming the people who won’t hire enough journalists so they
can properly do their job.”

Yet le Bas believes that “you can only make so many
excuses.

“Gypsies are categorised as being part of an environmental
problem in a lot of local paper reports. These appear to be echoes of hostile
public opinion. Rather than being talked about as genuine human beings who need
a place to live we’re likened to being blights on the landscape that lower
house prices in areas. I don’t think it helps that it’s also reflected in some
local authority policy-if you call certain councils you’ll be directed to their
internal environmental section.

“There’s a failure amongst some journalists to approach
Romany people to get a quote from them or a humanising picture. I’ve noticed
that pictures of Traveller and Romany communities are often taken from a long
way away, like how you’d take a picture of a flock of sheep, it’s almost like
they’re livestock. You don’t often see close-ups of individuals or even their
faces which could imply to some people that we’re dangerous.

“As a journalist your job is to get both sides of the story
of a conflict but quite often journalists report on issues as questions of
ethnic strife; them against us.

“All we want is the same crack of the whip everyone else
gets.”

He also believes that some article focuses represent a “very
twisted set of values.”

“The number of the crimes carried out on ethnic Traveller
communities and their severity when compared with the petty crimes of which they
are often accused are so disproportionately and wrongly focused on in some
parts of the media.”

A Bolton News article
printed in September could be one such case. Titled “Burnley MP hits out at
massive clean-up bill as travellers set up illegal camp” it seemed to allege
that legal and clean-up costs involving a group of Travellers was costing “tens
of thousands of pounds.”

It linked them to “illegal” activities, a trend spotted by Donnacha
who states: “they are the last group defined by their ethnicity who are
targeted by biased coverage which includes an increasing crime focus.”

The actual truthfulness of the article's focus was also disputed by a local councillor.

Howard Baker, councillor for the Trinity ward said: “The
headline is a severe exaggeration. I looked into it and found it cost in
between £130-£200 to move them through court.”

Whether the journalist had verified his source remains
unclear.

“I think journalists should always check their sources then
double check them. There are always concerns from the local communities about
Travellers which come with stereotyped images. I think articles like that one
can fan the flames of distrust and dislike.”

Much of the paper’s recent coverage concentrates
on land disputes and efforts to keep Travellers away from sites. A solitary
article and a few letters from readers consider the underlying issue of a lack
of legal site provision whilst a comment from the communities was found only in
one story. All the reporters also failed to identify them as proper ethnic
groups by not capitalising “Gypsy” or “Traveller” within their articles.

A failing to adequately critique public perceptions and
produce well-informed reports in the local press is a claim that Westmorland
Gazette news editor, Mike Addison, strongly denies.

“I think our paper is exceptionally fair and accurate. We
have the largest amount of Gypsies and Travellers coming into the area due to
the Appleby Fair. We do features, interviews and take pictures to try put their
viewpoints across as there is a lot of ill feeling from the communities that they
pass through.

“Our reportage is never criticised by the public for being
unfair. Local papers can only present readers’ opinions then try to get an
opposing view to ensure fairness. We as the press challenge their views.

“I think newspapers generally take a responsible attitude on
the whole to what they report.”

Accounts of the inadequate quality of some reports do not
essentially mean Traveller communities are being deliberately attacked. Le Bas
believes it may be more a matter of “ignorance, lack of facts and fear that
drive continued prejudices” in articles.

Maybe this goes some way to explaining McCann’s contention
that she has never been approached by a journalist for a quote despite being a
community awareness-raiser.

He said: “The relationship of journalists with Travellers is
almost non-existent. It’s an unacceptable form of racism but there’s almost no
communication between the two. I know that reception to us can be hostile- the
problem is there aren’t any intermediaries. It’s a real weakness we have.”

Yet Addison again states that such an issue doesn’t exist in
his area. He said: “They tend to put up a spokesman who we normally consult if
there are any problems and to balance news stories.”

To ensure consistently fairer coverage Donnacha believes it
is important to make sure spokespersons from these communities are available to
talk to journalists.

He suggests it should be part of a several-pronged effort to
make sure satisfactory reporting is standardised despite cutbacks.

“The challenge is to
rebuild journalists’ knowledge about these communities so they can report
intelligently and accurately about a story.

“Newsrooms should get
in touch with organisations which are trying to educate them and invite them
into the newsroom. I think if people actually begin to properly think about the
story there are a lot more interesting things than people being arrested or
doing something illegal or controversial.

“My fear is that any efforts will be undermined by fewer
local journalists so informed knowledge could be lacking. It will mean people
will avoid areas that are likely to cause problems in reporting, such as
Traveller communities.

“It’s also important
that we start rebuilding local media.
If big owners are no longer interested in sustaining it then people need to
take it back. We need to rebuild a sense of community media that belongs to
them and reflects the community.

He is also fairly optimistic that the explosion of social media
sites like Twitter will create more opportunities for members of discriminated-against
communities to produce their own published content.

“It could mean they don’t have to rely on big news agencies’
reports of them; they could produce them themselves. I expect in the next few
years more people will be able to tell their stories in a way that is engaging
to audiences.”

Le Bas would simply
like to see Travellers gain the respect that comes with knowing that somebody’s
ethnicity does not dictate their personality. He says: “This is the end result
but how we get there is the complex issue. At the moment it seems that
attitudes seem to be going backwards.”

Lord Leveson’s report commented on the continued negative representation
of Traveller communities within the mainstream media and the significant
influence these institutions can have over community relations and societal
perceptions. It stated that whilst newspapers are entitled to express strong
views on minority issues, immigration and asylum, it is important that stories are
accurate.

For some like Donnacha, le Bas and others, this does not go
far enough. They feel that reports should be supported by properly-informed
contexts to challenge popular myths and deep-rooted prejudices held by some sections
of the public. To them it is apparent that top-down legislative change only does
so much when challenging allegations of discrimination. It is not the reactive powers
of regulatory bodies but the grass-roots-led efforts that hold most hope for permanent
and progressive change.

What effect Leveson, cuts and new technologies will have on these
efforts to end substandard reporting and allegations of prejudiced reporting, coupled
with the problems of an uncertain economic climate, remains to be seen.

Saturday, 20 October 2012

At a time of increasing attacks on the British welfare system
I spoke to the organisers of one of the
few places of shelter for destitute people attempting the turbulent and
uncertain path to asylum in Greater Manchester, who this year are celebrating
ten years of crucial work in the community.

“Hold on, someone else has just turned up” shouts Mike Luft
to the team of volunteers about to drive back to their storage centre with the
project’s left-over food of the week. Late for the weekly drop-in service, the
man in question has walked for four hours in icy winds and rain from Salford to
Oldham to get to the project and collect the items that will help him survive
for the following seven days.

The desperation of the 70 or so people who attend the Oldham
Unity (Destitution Project) from around the region each week is stark. Founded
in 2002 by Luft and other members of the local community action network that
grew out of the aftermath of the 2001 Oldham riots the project is now one of
the largest frontline services for asylum seekers in Greater Manchester, with
around 20, mainly retired volunteers helping out each week. It provides subsistence
for those awaiting asylum appeal decisions who are struggling to survive on the
weekly living allowances granted by the government and others who find
themselves completely without aid after their appeals have been rejected.

Luft explained: “We realised at our community meetings with
local refugees and asylum seekers who live in the area that there was a massive
need for day-to-day help. Many of these people were not allowed to work,
couldn’t afford food or pay for accommodation so we decided to do what we could
to help.

“People can sometimes have a very distorted view of the
realities of asylum seekers in Britain. Not everyone knows about the meagre
amounts of £37.50 that adult asylum seekers live on each week, which sometimes
only comes in the form of a voucher that can only be used at certain shops.”

At the two hour drop-in visitors are given thirty “points”,
or roughly seven pounds, to spend on food and other essential items including
clothing that are bought with donations to the project and given by a mixture
of religious and secular organisations. A hot meal and refreshments are also
provided by a mix of local interfaith groups, such as the Baptist Church and
Planet Mercy whilst the British Red Cross covers their travel costs for up to
one year. Although recently having secured a deal with Fairshare, who
distributes food from local supermarkets to charities the project must still
find around £1500 each month to continue to run.

Whilst an integral part of the project, food is not the only
service provided by Oldham Unity. The drop-in acts as a crucial social space
for this part of the community for whom isolation and confusion are daily
occurrences. They provide practical legal advice to help people navigate the
complex asylum application process, access to free medical care, mentoring and
a safe space where people can socialise and share their experiences.

Luft himself is no stranger to the frustrations and hardships
surrounding claiming asylum, his grandmother a Jewish refugee from Russia and with
a past rooted in neighbourhoods of Manchester with large refugee populations.

“The people who come to us are not economic migrants, they
come to the UK in fear of their lives and the government should accept that and
actively help them. People have given up absolutely everything to escape
traumas and find a place of safety but sometimes I think the way they are dealt
with here is a complete affront to them.”

The lives of asylum seekers in the UK are ones epitomised by
being in a state of constant limbo. Fleeing to the country, they are met with a
disorientating, drawn-out asylum application process to become a refugee.

Although the UK receives fewer claims than the European
average, the following decision-making process is arduous, with rulings
sometimes taking up to several years to be made. Oldham Unity are aware of
situations where applicants have literally been forgotten about by the home
office, including one individual who waited more than ten years for a decision
to be made on his case.

Changes to legal aid paid to immigration lawyers, which has
introduced flat rates for some cases regardless of complexity, now means that
more people are losing access to some key advice services. This has made the
system a lot more bewildering for the many people who have no knowledge of the
UK’s legal process.

After such a lengthy process, most decisions only serve to
shatter asylum seekers hopes of acceptance, with 74% of cases being initially
refused according to the latest official data released in 2010. The decision to
make further appeals often wields little more success yet even these final,
outright rejections do not seal their fates.

“We have this crazy situation where people are turned down
for asylum but the government doesn’t deem it safe for them to return to their
own country. We see some people from Palestine, who because their country doesn’t
legally exist, they can’t be repatriated. They’re just completely ignored,
unable to live either here or in their home country”, said Luft.

“They can’t work and are only sometimes entitled to
temporary benefits under the government’s Section 4 asylum support.”

The realities of those who are successful are in many ways
no more secure. The general granting of an initial five year refugee status
makes it difficult to plan for the long-term, consigning refugees to a
foreseeable future of uncertainty and fear that is intensified by governmental
ability to have cases reviewed at any point during this time.

At the centre the volunteers are all too aware of the red-herring
that successful applications can signify. It can take up to six weeks to be
issued with a national insurance benefit number, in which time families are
left in virtual financial limbo, unable to claim state benefits such as job
seekers allowance or housing benefit and at the same time not legally allowed
to find employment. At this point the work of the project becomes even more
crucial for day-to-day survival.

Hopes for suitable and permanent housing are also far from
easy to ensure. One case the project is dealing with involves a family with six
children who upon being granted leave to remain in the UK were moved from the
temporary accommodation they had been living in for around four years to a
house in a different town. This has ignored the fact the family must now make
almost daily, long and unaffordable bus rides to take the children to the
school they enrolled in when they first moved to the country. They have since
had to move again due to receiving abuse from children in the area to a house
that some members of the project believe is not fit to live in. The delay in
processing the family’s national insurance numbers has meant that they have
only just been added to the social housing list, where they face tough and
lengthy competition for a house big enough to comfortably house the whole
family.

Nasreen, not her real name, is still waiting to hear a
decision from the government about her bid for refugee status. She spoke about
how the project provided her with a strong support network.

She said: “I had been living in the UK for about nine months
before I found out about the project. It
has helped me to understand and get access to the support that I’m
legally entitled to. Coming here has also helped me to meet lots of other
people in similar situations to myself and also form supportive relationships
with people who’ve been living in Oldham for a long time. I think it shows
communities working together at their best.”

Donations can be made to the Oldham Unity (Destitution
Project) c/o Baptist
Church Chaucer St.Oldham OL1 1BA. Those wanting to donate food and clothing
should contact
Stewart Bailey on 0161 652 2379.

Wednesday, 10 October 2012

A Greater Manchester
grandmother bringing up her grandchildren has highlighted concerns over what
she believes is a lack of substantial state support for kinship carers.

Linzi, who cares for a
relative’s two 10 year olds and is one of 200,000 kinship carers in the UK,
claims that local authority support available for them is often confusing and
not always easy to find.

Kinship carers, also known
as family and friends carers, are the grandparents, other relatives and close
contacts of children at risk of being taken into care who agree to look after
them for a substantial amount of time.

Some, including Linzi,
whose grandchildren are within the remit of Stockport Council, are now voicing
their concerns that the amount of financial and other support they are entitled
to is not always as substantial and as clear cut as what foster carers receive.

Foster carers are paid an
effective wage paid by councils who consider foster care a self-employed,
working role. In Stockport, for example, they can receive up to £345 per week plus additional allowances for
birthdays, Christmas and holidays per child. However, no
standardised, equivalent payment system exists for kinship guardians.

Whilst foster carers are
not eligible for child tax credits, which other guardians including kinship
carers can receive, they are eligible for other payments such as working tax
credits due to being recognised as self-employed by local authorities. They are
also entitled to respite, carer and child trips and training courses.

The lack of a substantial,
easy to understand nationwide policy for kinship carers has resulted in a
situation of payments and services available at the discretion of individual
local authorities. Most kinship carers get no help at all from their local
authority. This has also led kinship carers to be informally referred to in the
UK as “hidden” or “invisible” families.

This situation persists
despite the fact that, according to the Grandparents Plus charity, these families
are often in great need of state help.

The charity has published
numerous reports to back up its campaign to ensure better and more standardised
support systems be put in place for kinship carers. The reports have revealed
that most kinship care families say they have experienced financial hardship
due to bringing up relatives’ children, with two thirds reporting low household
incomes. A large proportion has had to cut their working hours or give up their
jobs entirely due to child care responsibilities. 85% of children in kinship
care are also reported to have emotional difficulties when they move in with
their carers.

Linzi, 50, who has cared
for three of her grandchildren along with her husband, is amongst those
attempting to raise awareness of kinship carers’ struggles in the UK to ensure
that they all have access to substantial and easy-to-navigate support services
within local authorities.

She said: “We do the same
job as foster carers but we don’t always get the same support and what help we
do get is generally means tested. We are also not entitled to parental leave
despite having the same role in our children’s lives.

“I’ve had to give up my job
to look after the children so I’m not entitled to JSA, income support and my
partner and I don’t qualify for working tax credits because neither of us works
the minimum 24 hours per week and as kinship carers we are not recognised by
the government as self-employed carers like foster parents.

“I get £129.15 a week
kinship allowance which is the maximum that they will pay for my two children and
£33.70 in child benefits. I also get annual child tax credits but that is all
the income support our family gets. It’s just not enough to compensate for the
changes that we’ve had to make such as buying a bigger house and taking out
another mortgage to have room for us all. It costs a lot to raise a child,
especially when it’s the second time around. I think there are many kinship
carers out there who feel like they’ve been left in limbo when it comes to
getting support from local authorities.

“I don’t think many kinship
carers would say they would prefer their grandchildren to be placed in care but
at the same time it is a very demanding task. I’ve already had my own children
but now I’m in a situation where I’ll be 60 and my partner almost 70 when my grandchildren
will probably be still living at home. It’s a lot of commitment at that age but
being a kinship carer is something that is hardly talked about in public.

“Just because we are all
family that should not imply that we can easily afford to look after them; that
a link has been made between the two is ridiculous. The government has not
taken into consideration that most kinship guardians don’t expect to find
themselves looking after their grandchildren so haven’t put any money aside. It
seems like emotional blackmail to me.”

Only 36% of carers are
currently working despite almost 3 quarters being in employment before taking
on the children. Over 65% have been described as living in poverty,
with around 41% of kinship carers predominantly dependent on welfare benefits.

Linzi said: “The amount of
time it takes to look after the children means I’m unable to get regular
employment yet I’m not treated as working by caring for them fulltime like
foster carers can be. A lot of kinship carers really struggle to make ends
meet. Sometimes you just feel like you’re really on your own.”

Sarah Wellard, policy and
research manager for Grandparents Plus, said: “The whole entitlement system for
kinship carers is a complete nightmare and varies widely from council to
council. Most kinship carers get no help at all, either practical or
financial, from their local authority. Often they are given poor information and
are sometimes misled.

“The whole system of
support from local authorities is incredibly complicated, and where kinship
carers do get support, this is usually discretionary and means tested.

“We need whole system
reform to ensure fairness in access to financial and practicalsupport
based on children’s needs. We also want to see carers able to get proper advice
and information so that theyare fully aware of what they are
entitled to. Many are left in the dark about services, benefits and support
that does exist out there for them.

“Some kinship carers are even
hesitant to contact social services to ask for help out of fear their child
will be taken away from them. The government must do more to reassure families
around this issue.”

Grandparents Plus offers advice and information to kinship carers to help
them access welfare benefits and support from their local authority. They also run
a peer support network and
provide details of local support groups and other relevant charities on their
website http://www.grandparentsplus.org.uk/advice.
To contact the charity call the confidential advice line on: 0300 123 7015
or email:advice@grandparentsplus.org.uk

Sunday, 23 September 2012

They’re constantly cited
as a priceless first rung on the employment ladder in an economy with few jobs
and one of the few, true saving graces that could stall and evenreverse the
escalating youth unemploymentsituation
in Britain.

Modern apprenticeship
schemes have made a dramatic comeback in the last few years. Since 2006 the
number of apprentices more than doubled, reaching 453,000 by the end of
2011. They’re the government’s palliative to a programme that hinges, in a seemingly
oppositional way, on cutbacks instead of investment for growth.

That the coalition is
advocating apprenticeships at a time when redundancy rates are high and the
ratio of job applications to available jobs is in some casesover 50 to
onecould seem an
attempt to tackle unemployment especially amongst young people, of whom the
number now classed as not in employment, education or training (NEETS) has
skyrocketed in the last year.

Apprenticeships have
obvious benefits both to applicants and wider society. They provide the
opportunity to learn a trade and develop skills that in theory should be a
stepping stone to a stable, mapped out future career and ensure that countries
retain a substantial amount of industrial experts and that knowledge of key
skills are not lost.

The government believes
that many apprenticeships lead to better chances of secure employment upon
completion. On the Apprenticeship website they also state that on average
apprentices earn around £170 a week, well above the minimum rate of £97.50 for
37.5 hours of work.

Yet there are growing
concerns about the way some apprenticeships are operating in the UK, in the
context of a recession-ridden economy. Some have suggested that motives for
companies to hire apprentices in reality sometimes fit less with the idealised
images. Instead of recreating the celebrated old-style German apprenticeships
and implying that employers understand the need to adequately equip future
generations with the knowledge to continue to provide key skills to society
apprenticeships could serve a more self interested cost-cutting and
profit-saving intent.

The elephant in the room
is the government’s current dismantling of the welfare system, whose focus on
“workfare” is part of an enormous scheme to radically cut government spending.
By pushing the growth of apprenticeships the coalition pays less in JSA and a
reduced amount to apprentice employers in grants and learning fee costs,
thereby serving their aim of spending cuts quite well. On top of this is
the problem of how to ensure that apprenticeships equal secure employment at a
time when industries are cutting back and shedding jobs. In this way, could
apprenticeships be a sop thrown to make us think something is being done to
tackle unemployment when in reality it is just masking the problem?

Michael, 16, from
Liverpool, is currently employed at a large charity shop through the retail
apprenticeship scheme which he enrolled on in July this year. He is concerned
about the pay, his conditions at work alongside the value of his apprenticeship
and is considering leaving the course due to financial worries that have
worsened for himself and his family since starting as an apprentice.

“I work 37.5 hours a week
for £100 a week with around 20 other staff, most of who are on some sort of
work placement or volunteers. My auntie, who I live with, has lost around £70 a
week in benefits due to me going on this apprenticeship because I’m now classed
as being in full-time employment. The council has done things like deduct £3
per week from her housing benefit which I’ve been told I must now pay. I don’t
get any separate travel expenses so I’ve also got to pay for the two hours
travel per day out of my wages. By me going on this apprenticeship we’re worse
off than when I was in college so I’m considering leaving the scheme and going
back into education. People who are on an apprenticeship should be paid minimum
wage because they are working for and benefitting the company. £2.60 per hour
is pure slave labour.”

Michael’s concern over low
pay is not alone. Searches on social media sites such as Twitter reveal pages
of criticism over having to work for up to 50 hours a week on pay drastically below
minimum wage. Adam Fisher, 18, wants to start an apprenticeship as he believes
that in the long run the qualifications and training will be beneficial to him
but is reluctant to leave his current job due to doubts over whether he can
afford the large drop in income.

“Getting paid £2.60 per
hour isridiculous. Skills training and practical
experience could help me start a better career but I don’t know how I willsurvive off£97 a week for doing 40 hoursat the moment” , he said.

My cousin took an
apprenticeship in gardening in 2006, earning the then minimum £80 per week. Yet
after he qualified he continued to be paid the same rate even though he was
legally entitled to at least minimum wage, arguably more considering he’d
undertaken a two years skilled training course. Six years on, long after he
completed his initial training and specialised in one area as well as now
occasionally taking charge of the day-to-day jobs when his boss is away his pay
is well below what it should be, to the extent that he is still sometimes not
even being paid minimum wage.

Michael is not just
worried about his pay. He thinks that after he has completed his 12 month
apprenticeship the company won’t keep him on as a full time staff member.

“It’s been suggested to me
that I won’t be kept on after I’ve qualified because they don’t have it in
their budget. So basically the low pay now isn’t really justified because the
company, like other apprentice employers, has no obligation to offer jobs even
if apprentices successfully complete the course. I think I’ll find it
hard to find a job after the year with just this apprenticeship qualification
because competition for jobs is so tough in Liverpool. I think they’ve
started taking on apprentices because we’re cheap labour. There hasn’t been
much talk of creating actual jobs for people off the back of this.”

Losing your job to make
way for another apprentice seems common practice in certain workplaces. Michael
spoke of a friend who had undertaken an apprenticeship in hospitality and
catering at a restaurant, only to be told there were no jobs for him after he
successfully completed the course despite continuing to hire apprentices.

In some cases companies
have even been reported to have gone so far as sacking staff members to replace
them with the cheaper rate apprentices. In Manchester, Tom (not his real name)
was employed full time as an estate agent until his boss told him that he was
closing the business to move away. It was only when his dad drove past the same
estate agents a few weeks later he had been made redundant to find not only
that the shop was still open but that the team had been replaced with
apprentices. Lacking sufficient former staff members, the potential for the
apprentices to benefit from the scheme was also doubtful.

Earlier this year theGuardianreported that despite the haemorrhage
of jobs from British manufacturing and engineering firms such as BAE Systems
and Bombardier apprenticeship figures in the same industry had risen by 25%.
One explanation could be that companies are safeguarding profits in the short
term by taking on apprentices over already qualified members, instead of taking
on both, a strategy that could be short-sighted for the company and risks
dividing apprentices and existing employees.

It’s not just in these
ways that some apprenticeships have come under fire. The core component of
apprenticeships is adequate training to ensure that apprentices come away from
their placement with adequate training and skills to do a specific job well.
Employers, with financial help from thegovernmentshould
have an adequate training programmes in place for apprentices. However in some
instances this has led to situation in which training providers, instead
of focusing on the highest quality content,undercut each other to provide the
cheapest service possible to employers to secure contracts. Without
substantial monitoring by the government to make sure this doesn't happen this
means that apprentices can sometimes come away without adequate training to
work their way up in their chosen field. In Michael’s case he believes that the
training in his apprenticeship has been inadequate.

“The training I’ve been
given has been pretty minimal; they trained me up to work on the shop
floor then stopped and college has said that they will just send me a work pack
out to complete at home to obtain my NVQ in retail and functional skills. I
applied to be a retail assistant; working on tills and focusing on customer
service but the manager is using me to do all the odd jobs that no one else
really wants to do, like cleaning the toilets and washing up used cutlery in
the staffroom.

“There are good
apprenticeships out there but I don’t think mine is one of them. If I had the
opportunity to move around different shops, work in the head office or even in
the fundraising department I’d have a much more rounded experience and a lot
more opportunities to specialise and progress in retail. It seems like the
managers haven’t bothered to create an adequate learning programme for the
apprentices which makes me question their motives behind offering
apprenticeships. I don’t think they took me on for the right reasons.

“The apprenticeship could
help me quite a lot in terms of getting an entry level job because it proves
that I have some experience but I’m missing a lot of the skills I’d have liked
to have gained to work my way up in retail. I think after a few weeks of
working at the shop I’d gained all the worthwhile experience it seems I’m going
to ever get whilst working there so now I just feel like I’m being kept on as
cheap labour. I don’t think that the qualifications themselves are that
important in themselves either, it looks like they just added the paper
qualification on to make it sound more official.”

Even Justin King, CEO of
Sainsbury’s parent company (J Sainsbury PLC), has commented on the ambiguous
makeup of some schemes doled out as “apprenticeships” to potential applicants.

He said:“I believe the word apprentice has
become hijacked. A lot of things masquerade as apprenticeships which are not
what you and I would recognise as an apprenticeship – learning a skill over an
extended period of time.”

Apprenticeships can be an
invaluable platform into a skilled career, if they offer the right sort of
training and prospects. Yet in some instances in Britain the term acts as
little more than a cover for government-endorsed cheap labour that struggles to
ensure secure employment for all those who successfully complete the courses or
even substantial training. The existence of unscrupulous, self-interested
apprentice employers suggests that the government is not actively ensuring that
apprenticeships are offered for the right reasons.

Apprenticeships
should be equipping people with adequate practical experience and knowledge to
become future experts in their fields. They should also be financially
practical, which the £2.60 rate is not, especially to those with existing jobs
and who have people who are dependent on their income. To make someone choose
between practical skills development and continuing their existing job with
which pays enough to make ends meet denies many people the opportunity to
become specialists in a certain role.

They should not be a tool
to reduce companies’ overheads, threaten existing employees jobs and offer
false hope of secure, long term employment to apprentices. They should also not
act as cut price JSA which could keep people in a continuous apprenticeship cyclein a society bereft of jobs or as an
indicator that the government is doing something to tackle the UK’s
unemployment problem. Without investment to create long-term jobs and develop
industries apprenticeships can’t resolve this issue. What they are doing is
hiding the reality of joblessness, particularly the real levels of youth
unemployment in the UK.

Saturday, 15 September 2012

Manchester’s unemployment rate is at its highest in 12 years.
84,600 people are now claiming JSA in the city, almost 30% of whom have been
unemployed for more than 6 months. For young people, those without jobs have
spiralled in number since 2000, with almost 900% more 18-24 year olds now jobless
and not in education or training.

Yet unemployment is only part of a bleak picture that has been
etched onto our contemporary landscape. Talk of the all too real possibility of
a privatised health service, the accelerated marketisation of education and the
obliteration of welfare support is now so widespread that they have become national
clichés.

It’s also an almost grotesque, parody-type situation where ATOS,
the company driving life-changing cuts to disabled people’s benefits are seen,
if only by a small yet powerful few, as a responsible sponsor of the
Paralympics.

For increasing numbers of people in Manchester and across the
UK, the ability to fight back en mass against regressive attacks on their lives
is complicated by the fact that they exist outside secure employment. Employment
brings with it the opportunity for union organisation and all the resulting
benefits such as easy channels of communication and organisation, even if this
sort of organisation is facing more difficulties of its own today.

At a time when more people are vulnerable due to existing
outside the scope of this form of organisation, whether they are unemployed,
students or retired, the emergence of another sort of union in Manchester is
even more relevant than ever.

Unite’s community union scheme, launched earlier this year, brings
people outside workplaces together and offers a concrete platform on which to
organise and access support services. Encouraging groups to become established
around the country , Unite have in a way reignited interest in the idea of
community unions that dates back (on a major level) in England at least to the
1930s. This was when the National
Unemployed Workers’ Movement formed amidst mass unemployment and poverty to
improve the conditions of the jobless galvanising the support of hundreds of thousands
at its marches.

Although created by Unite, this sort of union is different in
that it operates on a more grass roots level, allowing people who may feel
pushed to the margins of society to come together and find a strong political
voice of their own. For 50p per week the community unions give members the
chance to come together to form strong communities which take a stand and push
for co-ordinated, bottom-up action to create a better and fairer situation.

They also offer support services such as legal advice, cv and
letter application writing, interview tips, debt counselling, welfare benefits
check up and hardship grants.

Manchester is one of the cities with its own branches of the
community unions, Since being created in June the Manchester and Salford branch
now includes subgroups in Salford, North, South and East Manchester.

Tom Barlow, one of the organisers, thinks that Unite’s community
unions are especially important in our current time of recession and
reactionary political policies.

“community unions have always been a relevant idea but im glad
that a major union is now fully behind them on such a large scale basis. These
unions are comprised of some of the most vulnerable people in society who are
without a stable workplace and thus the potential for organised representation
that comes with that. With growing unemployment these people need this
representation now more than ever.

“We’ve got a lot of people in our groups who were active in
unions whilst in work but have lost their jobs. Lots of people who were
formerly employed who just can’t get work at the moment. The response we’ve had
so far is positive. The union isn’t allied to any specific political project
which I think helps it to have a lot broader membership base that’s made up of a
more diverse set of people who despite whatever differences they may have in
some ways all believe that action needs to be taken to stop what is happening at
the moment in Britain.

“We know there is a lot to campaign about but we also understand we need to be focused so that we have a better chance
of achieving change. At the moment we are concentrating on building around the
ATOS campaign, the healthcare company whose work assessment is threatening the lives of those with
disabilities. Recent national studies have claimed that numerous people have
committed suicide as a result of ATOS's decision made about their
benefits and suitability for work. At the moment we
are concentrating on ATOS's attacks on those who receive disability allowance. The cuts are absolutely devastating people’s
lives. We hope to start focusing on fuel poverty, council tax and housing
benefit cuts as well as focusing on the TUC demo on the 20th October.

“Community unions allow the unemployed, elderly and students to
focus on issues at a local level then build out and link with other branches
and unions around the country so that we have and feed into a strong web of
support that can’t easily be picked apart, for example, by governmental
policies, like what happened in the 1980s.”

The Greater Manchester Unite Community Union will be holding a
public meeting on 18th September at Friends Meeting House. More
details can be found hereand
via Unite.

Thursday, 13 September 2012

A short article that I wrote for the Lancashire Evening Post (proper posts will be going up this weekend!):

Youth unemployment in Preston has risen 800% in the last year, according to figures released this week.

The ONS data released on 12th September revealed that the number of young Prestonians in between the age of 16-24 not in employment, education or training (NEETS) has rocketed by 120 people in between August 2011 and 2012, from 15 to 135.

The statistics also highlighted a continued rise in general unemployment to almost eight per cent, a figure that has climbed five per cent in the last five years.

Mark Hendrick, Labour and Cooperative MP for Preston, perturbed by the figures

He said: “The dramatic increase in NEETS is terrible, these figures are far too high. Young people need work to get valuable practical job experience. Without these opportunities they can't embark upon a secure career path, which could seriously affect their prospects in the future.

“These figures highlight that employment rates and economic growth will not be achieved under the current government's policies. “

Thursday, 23 August 2012

Earlier this month Leeds Rhinos became the latest rugby
league club to reaffirm their active lead in the fight against homophobia. Dedicating
their home match against Widnes Vikings to raising funds for Stonewall, it
represents the latest in a substantial number of efforts within the sport to
diversify and push for equality, following the launch of the multi-facetedequality
campaign, “Tackle It”. It also comes just two years after the RFL took a
hard-line stance towards the Castleford fans caught hurling abuse at Gareth
Thomas, the first notable rugby player to ”come out” whilst active in the game
and a year after Stonewall awarded RFL a place in its top 100 gay-friendly
workplaces. Altogether this has had the
effect of encouraging some commentators to say rugby league, whilst still
having considerable way to go to eradicate homophobia completely has made more
significant ground than football in recent years.

It's sporting twin, rugby union, has made significant
grassroots level efforts to attract more LGBT defining people to the game who
may have distanced themselves from the sport due to fears or experiences of
homophobic attitudes. The International Gay Rugby Association Board (IGRAB), a
predominantly union based organisation founded in 2002 as an umbrella
organisation for the growing number of inclusive, self-defined LGBT rugby clubs around the
world, is trying to promote rugby as a non-discriminatory, all-inclusive sport
.

This year its gay rugby world cup, named after player Mark
Bingham who died in the 9/11 terrorist attacks, celebrated its sixth contest in
Manchester.The city is also home to IGRAB member Manchester Village Spartans RUFC, formed in 1999 initially to provide a supportive playing environment for men who identify as gay or bisexual. Gareth Longley, representative and player of the Village Spartans, talked to me about the positives
of having self-defined LGBT-friendly rugby teams, how the sport is making
progress in terms of equality and what more there is to be done to reach a time
when self-defined LGBT teams need no longer exist.

Why did you choose to
get involved with the Village Spartans?

I’d always played rugby as a kid but when I came out just
before going to university I gave it up because the perceived macho image of
university clubs didn’t appeal to me and due to a fear of discrimination within
them for being gay, although this was only a perception rather than due to an actual
bad experience. It was only when i moved to Manchester when i was 24 that i got
back into playing rugby after discovering the Spartans.

Do you think that
LGBT rugby clubs are important to the LGBT population?

I think they are important. It’s not that they necessarily
act principally as a haven for people who fear being persecuted for being openly
gay, although LGBT teams can be a valuable place to gain enough confidence in
the sport to perhaps join a mainstream team or at least play with others
regardless of their sexuality. We hope that rugby players and officials in
general are really trying to work towards greater inclusivity within their clubs
both nationally and internationally.

LGBT teams can, however, additionally offer a certain type
of social understanding that a chiefly straight team can’t always do to the
same degree. On a night out for example, Manchester Spartans go predominantly to
the gay bars and I can talk to them about my relationship more openly because
the majority of them are gay too so I think it offers the opportunity to feel a
real part of the team both on and off the pitch due to having that common
ground in social terms. We hope to be capitalising on this aspect with gay men
interested in rugby.

At the end of the day we are there to play rugby and our
team is an inclusive one, it’s by no means exclusive to any particular
sexuality so we welcome all men who show an interest in playing for us. I think
self-defined, LGBT-friendly teams work both ways in attempting to encourage
inclusivity and diversity whilst highlighting to everyone that sexuality is by
no means a barrier to being good at sport.

Do you think that
rugby is more progressive in terms of its attempts to ensure substantial LGBT
equality and inclusivity than football and if so, why?

I think rugby in the main has been more progressive in this
area. I can’t comment on rugby league but in terms of rugby union I’d say that
maybe this is due in part to the fact that historically union was and continues
to be a lot more of an upper middle class sport where it’s been easier for
people to ‘come out’ due to their more privileged positions. This can be seen
on an international level too to some extent.
Rugby Union is now gaining popularity in the more affluent gay scenes in
countries where it’s traditionally not been played such as the US within some
expensive universities.

In general though, perceptions in sport are changing for the
better across the board in terms of real inclusivity due to changing social
attitudes. Sexuality shouldn’t be a barrier to sport and I envisage a time
where in ten, 15 years we won’t have to have LGBT teams because sport will be
completely inclusive. We’ve still got a long way to go yet though both in union
and league as in other major sports.

Have you been
successful in attracting more LGBT people into the sport?

I think we’ve helped make an impact; some people shy away
from the sport at school because of fears that they’ll be discriminated against
for being gay and feeling that they couldn’t adequately identify with the
people that they were playing with. LGBT teams offer people the chance to take
up the sport at a much later age than in regular adult teams where a certain
standard of playing is more likely to be expected. Because of this it has the
ability to offer newcomers a safe inroad into the sport that’s more open to
beginner level playing.

We like to give opportunities to people who haven’t come
from a sporting background not only to gain confidence to play the sport but
get involved in the team-oriented social side too. We want to give people the
chance to become involved in an activity that’s bigger and broader socially
than just going to a gay bar, its giving people the chance to be part of
something bigger that comes with a solid support network founded on team
mentality.

I think hosting the rugby world cup in Manchester definitely
highlighted the sport’s attempts to encourage people interested in playing the
sport but with little experience to get involved, but I’m not sure that it alone
radically increased our team’s LGBT following or participation.

What do you envisage
for the future of LGBT teams such as yours?

Now that we have an established team our focus is to improve
the quality of the rugby that we play. Being a niche team in the past we’ve
struggled to get enough players to ensure we’ve got reserves which has limited
us in terms of inevitable injuries that players suffer. We’d love to do more
outreach to change people’s perceptions of gay men not being sporty and to
encourage gay men and boys that do like sport to stay involved in it;
unfortunately we don’t have the resources to be able to do that effectively at
the moment. We hope that by improving the standard of the team will be able to
challenge any continuing stereotypes some people may still hold about gay men
in sports.

Now that we’ve been established for a while people’s
attitudes towards us have changed; they realise that we are just blokes who
happen to fancy men and are good at rugby. Hopefully that’s something that will
ripple throughout the community; we want people to see us as rugby players
first and as gay men second.

I think educating people that just because you’re gay it doesn’t mean that you’re going to jump on them in the shower or be remotely interested in them is an important part of what both LGBT teams and the wider rugby community need to focus on. Hopefully with the support of big names like Ben Cohen, Gareth Thomas and Mark Bingham alongside other notable LGBT public figures and governing sports bodies like RFL and RFU we will all play a part in helping stamp out homophobic bullying in sport.